ceeb

Vs strong field -- ♦ for sure as I have painfully been taught to go passive. In random field I think ♠. The ♥ may be ok against 3nt but feels too panicky against 2NT. Yes, partner is likely to return whatever I lead so the ♥'s may get forgotten if I don't lead them. But most likely it just costs a trick or two. Charles

Adam's elegant analysis shows the gain for the finesse occurs when RHO is 02 in the majors. But that gives LHO Kxx,xxx,10xxx,Jxx at most. I do not understand bidding 5♦ with that (notwithstanding Fluffy's comment that it was the case). Even 4♦ seems strange. No, LHO must have at least 5 diamonds, and I would think a singleton as well. With ♦AKQ and ♣KQJ, RHO doesn't need to be 56; even 45 is possible. The closest I can find to a believable layout is [hv=d=e&n=saqjxxhkq10xxdjcxx&w=skxxhxdxxxxxcxxxx&e=shxxxxdakqxckqjxx&s=s109xxxhajxdxxxcax]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] Anyway, I'm a believer in the spade finesse. Charles Brenner

duck, win the trump shift in hand then trump Q, finesse heart & play 3rd round. LHO will be endplayed on ruffing in if holding dA and 10 or 9 of clubs.

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=sq9hq1063dkcakq652&e=s10853hj42daq1082c8]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West East . . . . P 1♣ 1♠ 2♥ 2NT(1) 3♣ 3♥ (1) artificial Lead is a low diamond. You win the K, play club A, club ruff (would you?) on which North plays 3,4 and South plays 7,J. You cash the top diamonds, North revealing in all 5,9,J and South plays in order the 4,3,7. You now ruff a spade (would you?) bringing the 2 from South and the Ace from North. This was an early hand from a knockout round in the World Championships. What's your best shot? Charles Brenner

peace

2NT unconcerned. Pass -- considerably concerned but there's not clear route to a plus, and this can be a bonanza.

Yes, normally 3rd from 6. The reason for the method, as opposed to old-fashioned 4th best, is surely to avoid the ambiguity of low from both 3 & from 4. Since therefore the goal is to give a clear count signal, give a clear count signal. Think of the method as an extension of current count. If the 3rd from 6 is too valuable to waste, do the best you can, probably the 4th best one.

If East doesn't throw a heart on the diamonds, just cash both aces. Charles

I'm thinking West might have ♥Q87, ♦xxx. Charles Ok, bad example. I fell for a trap. But cannot East hold ♠K, ♥AQ1098, ♦xx, ♣Kxxxx? Charles

I'm thinking West might have ♥Q87, ♦xxx. Low from dummy leads to 9 easy tricks: Play ♥K. If it wins, run diamonds, exit ♥, wait for 9th trick. If ♥K is unblock, then cert dummy entry coming and happiness. Play the ♥J though and E can safely play the ♥A. The ♥J can cost. Charles

♠ ♠ works if pd has 2 aces, or ♥A + ♠K, or ♥A + sing ♦. ♦ requires singleton ♦ plus ♠A or ♥A. Hence by this rough accounting the ♠ has 5 chances and the ♦ only 2. Moreover, it never seems to be partner that has the singleton -- declarer after all has shown length in another suit. -- Charles

I was wondering if Helgemo judged against AQJ based on table action. With QJ, it might take the defender a moment to realize that only the Q is correct. If there was no delay that might indicate nothing to think about. -- Charles

to find the best slam. Possibly that means the one that goes down the least, but this hand is so much stronger than it need be -- and of aces, at least, surely we have enough. Start with 4NT, takeout but of what definition I'm not sure. Partner will bid up the line though. Over 5C, I want to give partner another chance to choose diamonds. 5D (to be followed by 6C) has two downsides: 1. Partner might pass when we belong in 6 (but also we might belong in 5, so that is perhaps an acceptable risk), and 2. partner assuming I have definitely the red suits might jump to 6H. I doubt that 5S or 5NT will send the right message. So I'd bid 6C. I take your point about "huge edge." Against opponents are sure-footed with this hand, I'm going to lose. -- Charles

I don't know if this follows, I agree it's 500 or 800 most likely so you have to weigh beating 4S against them bidding 5S and going down. If you think the latter is more likely it makes sense to bid. That says that bidding 5D is playing RHO's game (poker). Pass. -- Charles

1. yes 2. no -- prefer 5D 3. 6D. I was going to say that it can't be expensive (whereas defending 5S can), but after they bid 6S and I guess wrong I'll eat my words. 4. same guy? -- Charles

Pass, with obvious misgivings. RHO's bidding makes sense with 10 diamonds in which case I've just cooperated with RHO's coup of finding the only way to be plus. If RHO has another hand -- say side suit of hearts -- with which 3D makes, then possibly 3NT is down anyway. At the table I'd figure it is more likely that nutty and possibly stoned RHO is playing poker with fewer than 9 tricks, than that he actually has the rare hand such as 10 diamonds. Given that the hand is presented as a problem of course the odds change but I'll play along as if at the table. -- Charles

Odds are that the 4♦ bidder has at least 5, that I have 6, and that the slam leaper is not void in partner's suit and cue bid. That leaves zero or one diamond for our doubling partner. That's reason enough already to assume zero on the double but in addition, partner would be reluctant to double with a singleton knowing that quite likely we would diagnose diamond shortness as we do and would therefore be likely to take the double as a diamond void. I would lead a high diamond spot. If I'm wrong about the ruff I don't see that an honor lead would help me and if I'm right it could only hurt. If partner has the ♥A no signal from me will matter; if not I don't want to put partner off a trump exit if that is best. -- Charles

"But what was North reason not to ruff the clubs?" With six trumps, declarer would simply pull trumps and claim: 2 spades, 6 trumps, 1 diamond and 1 ruff, 3 clubs. Therefore Meckstroth knew declarer had only 5 trumps. Further, Meckstroth could see that with KQJxx of trumps declarer should could and should ruff one diamond low, return to hand ruffing a LOW club, ruff a diamond high, and hope the trumps are 3-2. Therefore Meckstroth "knew" that his partner had the J of trumps. In that case, the hand is sure to go down if he discards, whereas ruffing in with any card entails a slight risk that declarer will then be able to pick up the trumps. -- Charles